A+ A A-

Still time to get your tickets to the WOW Sweepstakes Ball on Saturday

To the edtior,
Dear Friends of the WOW Trail:
This Saturday, May 18th, we will be hosting our 10th WOW Sweepstakes Ball at the Lake Opechee Conference Center. This event, presented by Meredith Village Savings Bank, is our most important fundraising event, helping to fund the on-going expansion and maintenance of the trail. The WOW Sweepstakes Ball has raised almost $300,000 to date to help fund this exciting project.
Tickets to the event cost $100 and include admission and dinner for two people, entertainment with Paul Warnick's Phil 'N The Blanks, dancing, cash bar and lots of fun. Every ticket is entered into the sweepstakes contest and $13,000 in cash prizes will be given away that evening, including a $10,000 grand prize! You do not need to be present to win.
Please show your support of the WOW Trail by purchasing a ticket. With only 300 tickets sold, the odds of winning a cash prize are 1 in 30! Perhaps you could share the cost of a ticket with your friends, family or colleagues in order to help make this fundraising event a success.
Tickets are available at the Chamber of Commerce, Laconia Athletic & Swim Club, Patrick's or on-line at www.meadowbrook.net.
For more information about the WOW Trail go to www.wowtrail.org or be a friend of the WOW Trail's Facebook page.
Hope to see you at the event and out on the trail!
Allan Beetle and the
WOW Trail Board of Directors

Last Updated on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 12:13

Hits: 385

Bush admin. had nothing to do with 'fast & furious', look it up

To the editor,
Just read James Veverka's letter in the May 11 paper. It's amusing to listen to the moonbats continue to blame Bush for everything wrong now in the second term of Obamunism. Veverka writes yet another letter filled with lies and misinformation. He states that operation "fast and furious" was a Bush plan, not an Obama plan. Wrong again. Operation "fast and furious" was the brainchild of the Obama administration, hatched on October 26,2009 by Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden, Assistant AG Lanny A. Breuer, Acting ATF Director Kenneth E. Melson, DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart, FBI Director Robert Mueller and the top federal prosecutors in the southwestern border states. Operation 'fast and furious' was put into play on October 31, 2009.
For those of you who don't know any better, Barack Hussein Obama was sworn into office on Jan. 20, 2009. No need to take my word for it, just look it up online. I found this information on the left, liberal-leaning wikipedia website.
Jay Kennedy

Last Updated on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 12:09

Hits: 396

If you want something done you have to be a single-issue voter

To the editor,
I was watching Senator Ayotte "performing" in Warren last week. She certainly knows how to pick her audience. I thought I was watching a church service. The audience was so "well behaved" and asking softball questions — except for a couple that dared register disapproval but they got booed down by the majority and the law slowly approaching one of them. It's all in the name of democracy you know.
Ever marvel at the fact that Congress enjoys almost a single digit approval rating and yet when one of them comes to town (admittedly a well chosen town) they suddenly acquire almost a divine persona? Both Republicans and Democrats share this mystery. Not even the lady who had lost her child by way of a gun could sway Ayotte or the audience. "Thank you for coming" was the senator's last words on the subject. It seemed to me that lady just walked out of the room — at least I think it was her. Could have been just another disgruntled observer who had had enough of the pablum.
I've been scanning some of the comments on the opinion pages (most of them are too long to read) and I can't help but notice some of them. "We're so blessed to have her"; "New Hampshire is so lucky to have her". Sheesh, I've been trying to unravel this mystery for most of my adult life and have finally come to the conclusion that good old Abe had it right: "you can fool some of the people all the time" — it's just a simple fact of life.
I've come to another conclusion about politicians. If you want something done then you have to resort to being a single-issue voter or at the very most a double-issue voter (don't want to press our luck here) just like the majority of white Catholics and Evangelicals (who voted for Romney of course). My two issues will be a much stronger gun legislation that is being presented to us at the moment and of course a sensible sane immigration policy that recognizes reality. I'm not holding my breath.
George Maloof

Last Updated on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 12:05

Hits: 305

Can't sue manufacturer over product that works as promised

To the editor,
Here on Friday, in the letters, Bernadette Loesch asks me by name to answer her question: How much firepower does a citizen need to protect their home? That's an honest question and I'll give her my honest answer. I don't know.
No one does because no one can see into the future and tell me if my home will ever be attacked. Perhaps never or perhaps tonight. One home invader or 10, can you tell me Bernadette? Of course not, so your question is based on your opinion based on what your political beliefs are not on anything measurable. Each person makes these judgments based on their personal beliefs. Mine are that it's better to have a gun and not need it then to need it and not have it. I defy any other person to tell me that I do not have that right to try to defend myself and my family. I defy you or any other person to tell me what I do or do not need because you do not and can not see into the future.
As for suing gun manufactures you logic is faulty. Any lawyer will tell you you can't sue the manufactures for selling equipment that works as advertised. Nor can you sue a manufacture for harm caused when an individual misuses a legally produced product. That fact has nothing to do with gun manufactures it relates to any product, cars, airplanes, plumbing fixtures, pressure cookers just anything at all.
As for your apparent concern about "gun violence", why not call it what it really is? It's criminal violence. It is a fact that less then two tenths of one percent of legal gun owners commit gun involved crimes. So why do your political leaders choose to target this law abiding segment of our society? Why do they not target the criminals who commit gun crimes. To say we don't have strong enough gun laws is just wrong. Federal laws allow for a 10 year prison term for the use of a firearm in commission of a crime plus additional five years for each bullet in the gun. So you answer me this, why do these laws never seem to be applied by the government? If they only apply to federal crimes why do states like Illinois not adopt them? Seems to me your political leaders are feeding you what they want, not what you want. Think about that a little bit Bernadette and get back to me.
Steve Earle

Last Updated on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 12:02

Hits: 316

Fact that lots of people believe something doesn't man it's true

To the editor,
In response to Ms. Shealy's referencing of Fox News and MSNBC, I would like to begin by reviewing accepted journalistic ethics and standards. While various existing codes have some differences, most share common elements, including the principals of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability. Fox News, apparently Ms. Shealy's prime source of news, is unencumbered by journalistic ethics. They are quick to break any rumor, opinion, half-truth, distortion or lie as "hard news."
As we all know, Fox News is the conservative alternative for viewers like Ms. Shealy who believe the so-called mainstream media have a liberal bent. It's shows offer a steady diet of right-of-center commentary delivered with plenty of attitude and verbal sparing. Fox News is popular because it is entertaining, but it has little to do with objective reporting. This "news" agency is incapable of recognizing the very craft they're supposed to practice.
Executives of Fox News have boasted that their network aims to be "the voice of opposition." What ever happened to "Fair and Balanced"? A former Fox News producer, Charlie Reina, described the Fox newsroom as being "permeated with bias." He described how executive memos were distributed electronically each morning addressing the stories that would be covered and often suggesting, "how they should be covered." "At the fair and balanced network no one in authority in the newsroom makes a move unmeasured against management's politics, actual or perceived." As long as Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes rule Fox's roost, the network will be the last place to find "balanced journalism" –— it's a megaphone for right wing propaganda.
In her statements that we "study the Muslim faith in our schools" and "Watch out America . . . God is aware and very patient. He will not hold his anger long", Ms. Shealy exemplifies two of Fox's favorite techniques — fear and the Christian God. With Fox there is never a break from fear: from Muslims, to swine flu, to recession, to homosexuals, to immigrants. The belief at Fox seems to be that when people are afraid, they don't think rationally. And when they don't think rationally, they'll believe anything. Also at FNC, they like to portray themselves as one of "the people" and those with opposing views as an enemy of the people. The opponent is often referred to as "elitist", a "bureaucrat", "government insider", etc.
FNC, as does Ms. Shealy, will invoke Christianity. The idea is to declare yourself and your allies as patriots, Christians and "real Americans" and any one who challenges them is not. Basically, God loves Fox and Republicans and America, and hates taxes and anyone who doesn't love the other three. Because they have been chosen by God to speak on behalf of all Americans, they perceive any challenge as immoral.
Fox audiences, birthers and tea partiers often defend their arguments by pointing to the fact that a lot of people share the same views. This is a reasonable point to the extent that Murdoch's News Corporation, as pointed out by Ms. Shealy, reaches a far larger audience than any other single media outlet. But, the fact that a lot of people believe something is not necessarily a sign that it's true; it's just a sign that it's been effectively marketed.
My criticism of Fox News should not be interpreted as defending any of the other news networks that also neglect journalistic ethics.
L. J. Siden

Last Updated on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 11:56

Hits: 354

The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register